fs_delete_file

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that directories are rejected, but omits crucial behavioral details for a delete operation: irreversibility, permission requirements, symlink handling, and failure behavior. This is dangerously minimal for a destructive action.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff or redundancy. Every word carries meaning, making it highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although the tool is simple and a skeleton output exists, this is a destructive operation with no annotations. The description covers the basic purpose but lacks essential context about side effects, error cases, and permission requirements. The absence of such context makes it inadequate for safe invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only implies that file_path must be a regular file. It adds no information about path format (absolute/relative), resolution, or constraints beyond the directory rejection. The description does not compensate for the schema gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('single regular file'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like copy, move, and search operations. It also explicitly notes that directories are rejected, further narrowing the purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description states it is for deleting a single regular file and not a directory, which gives clear usage context relative to file-type operations. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other cases, so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.